We can’t afford the rich is the proper reply to “we can’t afford social security.” When dividing up societies spoils you have to really take a good look at the contribution of the rich. Too often it’s extract, or it’s not actually a contribution it’s a big net negative or a degradation of society- the rich and their unnecessary power. Through their sponsored media they always telling us to have religious veneration through the market which bestows their wealth and the more efficient it is a doing this we are told the more free it is. It’s the same thing for calls for charity, this a slightly veiled call for the rich to be unfettered in their attempts to convert money into raw power, this is a call to allow the rich to maximize their power. The majority of the current regressive rich made their money in real estate or in casino type banking/stock games.
Its isn’t so much re-distribution that we need to be concerned with but the initial distribution of wealth. Social security implies a more stable society with less money power going into the creation of useless, destructive, non-contributing, destabilizing largely arbitrary concentrations of private wealth. The world would be better off if people like the Koch’s had no money as they attempt to abuse power with it and attempt to use it to reduce the quality of life and standard of living of others who either actually contribute or contribute a lot more collectively. A society has to ask what its wealth is buying, its it a higher quality of life and greater useful stability or is it a toxic social cancer?